HHS wrote:I have to agree a bit to Detlef:
I wonder why the bo105's cockpit has 4 stars? As always told from Melchior it is not the finished cockpit and everyone who has seen the real one knows why....
The point is: what actually does this star system means? What is the meaning of 5 stars? What of 4 stars?
How we can say that a fdm is realistic? if we do know it is tested by real pilot? Or by reaching the same values given in the POH?
And are this for the official release or the developement version? The official 1.9.1 bo105 isn't that much realistic like the version in CVS....
Though I like the idea of a ranking, it doesn't give enough information yet, and that's the main point- it is rather subjective.
OK, let me put it from a different angle of view (besides the fact that I wanted to give the bo105 cockpit a 3, not 4, but forgot to change it
).
There are plenty of aircrafts floating around in different states and people are having a hard time of selecting one of their choice. Is it flyable? In most cases yes, at least sort of. But then comes the aspect of more advanced things like having a 3D cockpit, the FDM, etc. So I like the ranking in general which should give an idea of what to expect. However a general ranking is not enough as stated earlier- what does 4 stars mean- an incomplete FDM or no documentation or no 3D cockpit? A finer granularity is required- here it is.
All rankings are of course highly subjective, especially the FDM ranking. Most of us are not able to judge the CitationX FDM in terms of realism. But we can give a ranking based on stability and completeness. Is the approach speed appropriate or not according to the public specs, does it suddenly behave unpredictable when extending flaps, can I really slow down below 60 knots with no flaps and slats extended and have only 5° AOA (I hope not) etc.
This rating will be a rough idea of what to expect from the aircraft and its FDM- it might vary between 3 and 4 stars or 4 and 5 stars or 1 and 2 stars depending on the person who rated but it will not show great variance (2 to 5 or 0 to 4, etc.).
Similar things for the cockpit- does it have all instruments required for basic and advanced flight as well as navigation, can they be operated and then how realistic is it to have the device in the plane in question.
Most people are not interested in the real deep differences between the CitationX and a CRJ jet as long as the 3D model is correct and both do not behave like an F16.
The ranking should get them to a point where they can choose regarding usability of the aircraft. Realism and detailed authenticity is a different thing then which can not be covered by a ranking.